Search

Purpose: It is unclear how NCCN guidelines recommend "supportive care" and "best supportive care" in oncology practice. We examined the usage of "supportive care" and "best supportive care" in NCCN guidelines and compared between solid tumor and hematologic malignancy guidelines. Methods: We reviewed all updated NCCN Guidelines for Treatment of Cancer in October 2019. We documented the frequency of occurrence, definition, and timing of introduction of each term. We compared between solid tumor and hematologic malignancy guidelines. Results: We identified a total of 37 solid tumor and 16 hematologic guidelines. Thirty-seven (70%) guidelines mentioned "supportive care" and 36 (68%) mentioned "best supportive care." Hematologic guidelines were significantly more likely than solid tumor guidelines to use the term "supportive care" (median occurrence 19 vs. 2; P = 0.001) and to describe "supportive care" as management of cancer-related complications (N = 11/15, 73% vs. N = 2/22, 9%; P < 0.001). Domains of specialist palliative care were infrequently mentioned (N = 10/37, 27%). In contrast, solid tumor guidelines were significantly more likely than hematologic guidelines to mention "best supportive care" (median occurrence 6 vs. 0; P = 0.016). This term was rarely defined and mostly used in the advanced disease setting. Conclusion: "Supportive care" and "best supportive care" were frequently used in NCCN guidelines, with significant variations in usage between solid tumor and hematologic oncologists. "Supportive care" was mostly limited to management of cancer-related complications and treatment adverse effects in NCCN guidelines, highlighting the need to go beyond the traditional biomedical model to more a patient-centered care model with greater integration of palliative care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To describe knowledge about human papillomavirus (HPV), HPV-related care behavior, and advocacy intent (e.g., vaccine recommendation and willingness to become an advocate for vaccination) and to investigate associations between knowledge, HPV-related care behavior, and advocacy intent among HPV-related cancer survivors.Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was offered through Qualtrics to HPV-related cancer survivors who were either volunteers at a cancer center or patients of survivorship clinics.Results: A total of 200 survivors responded. Only 33.2% of respondents reported knowing their cancer was HPV-related and 56.8% reported HPV vaccine is safe. Participants who knew that their cancer was caused by HPV were more likely to have vaccinated their children (p < .001). Also, participants who knew that the vaccine is safe were more willing to recommend the vaccine (p < .001), to be a peer mentor for others with HPV-related cancers (43.2% vs. 14.0%, p < .001), and to act as an advocate for increasing vaccination rates (44.1% vs. 24.4%, p = 0.01). Finally, survivors who were aware of the vaccine's effectiveness in decreasing precancerous lesions were more likely to recommend the vaccine (45.7% vs. 12.0%, p = .002).Conclusions: Raising survivor awareness of the link between HPV and cancer and HPV vaccine safety may increase their willingness to serve as powerful opinion leaders and peer mentors to promote HPV vaccination. Providers may take the simple step of informing patients that their cancer is HPV-related and HPV vaccine is safe to increase the number of informed and empowered survivors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to evaluate if locus of control (LOC) predicts various quality of life (QOL) and mental well-being measures among terminally ill cancer patients at the time of palliative care consult.Methods: Multi-site analysis of patients with advanced cancer being seen as new patients in a Palliative and Supportive Care outpatient clinic. Patients completed the following surveys: locus of control (LOC) scale, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-General (FACT-G), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Spiritual (FACIT-Sp), Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS), and Herth Hope Index (HHI). Regression models were created to examine the effect of LOC upon QOL, symptoms, and other measures of mental well-being. These models adjusted for the effect of age, gender, race, partnership status, education, and months since diagnosis as potential confounders.Results: This study enrolled 100 patients. After adjusting for site, race, and partnership status, higher levels of LOC chance predicted decreased QOL (FACT-G) (p < 0.01). Higher levels of LOC chance also correlated with increased depression and anxiety (p ≤ 0.01) and decreased meaning/peace and faith (p ≤ 0.01). Additionally, higher levels of LOC chance predicted decreased hope (HHI) (p ≤ 0.001).Conclusions: Terminally ill cancer patients with a high LOC chance may be at risk for decreased physical and mental well-being at the end of life. Efforts should be made to identify these patients and design interventions to increase their feeling of control over the situation in order to improve physical and mental well-being at the end of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: While overall survival from gynecologic malignancies has greatly improved over the last three decades, required treatments can lead to multiple health issues for survivors. Our objective was to identify health concerns that gynecologic cancer survivors face.Methods: A systematic, stratified sample of women with gynecologic malignancies was surveyed for 18 health issues occurring before, during, or after treatment. The impact of clinical features and treatment modality on health issues was assessed through multivariate logistic regression models.Results: Of 2,546 surveys mailed, 622 were not received by eligible subjects secondary to invalid address, incorrect diagnosis, or death. Thus, 1924 survivors potentially received surveys. Of the 1,029 surveys (53.5%) completed, median age was 59 years; diagnoses included 29% cervical, 26% endometrial, 26% ovarian/primary peritoneal/fallopian tube, 12.1% vulvar, and 5.4% vaginal cancers. The most frequently reported health issues included fatigue (60.6%), sleep disturbance (54.9%), urinary difficulties (50.9%), sexual dysfunction (48.4%), neurologic issues (45.4%), bowel complaints (42.0%), depression (41.3%), and memory problems (41.2%). These rankings were consistent with patients' self-reported rankings of "highest impact" personal issues. After controlling for demographic and clinical variables, multivariate analyses revealed that treatment modality impacted the odds of experiencing a given health issue.Conclusions: Our study demonstrates that gynecologic cancer survivors experience a high frequency of health conditions and highlights the association between treatment modality and specific health concerns.Implications For Cancer Survivors: The study findings highlight the multiple health concerns experienced by gynecologic cancer survivors and suggest the potential for developing interventions to mitigate these concerns in survivorship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]